Introduction

On January 22-23, 1999, the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) brought
together an array of public safety, legal, and adjudication representatives
to discuss traffic safety, specifically the problems associated with aggressive
driving. Participants included prosecutors, district court judges, law
enforcement and emergency personnel, district and states attorneys, criminal
defense attorneys, safety advocates and activists, researchers, and government
policy and state public safety personnel. The symposium sought to derive
action steps toward solving the problem of aggressive driving as approached
from six different perspectives: (1) statutory approaches, (2) applied
technology, (3) charging decisions, (4) sentencing strategies, (5) community
leadership, and (6) enforcement strategies. These six categories served
as topic areas for framing participant discussions and resulting recommendations
developed in breakout sessions.

In
addition to breakout sessions, plenary sessions featured remarks by the
Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater, NHTSA Administrator Ricardo
Martinez, FHWA Administrator Kenneth Wykle, and a victim of an aggressive
driving collision. Paper presenters reported on the results of preconference
focus groups and provided background and overview information on the problem
of aggressive driving. Panel presentations focused on the issues, research,
and approaches of other driving-related organizations.

The
Problem
According to a NHTSA survey on aggressive driving attitudes and behaviors
(released at the conference), more than 60 percent of drivers see unsafe
driving by others, including speeding, as a major personal threat to themselves
and their families. More than half admitted themselves to driving aggressively
on occasion. Although there is not one standard, accepted definition of
aggressive driving, NHTSA currently defines it as "the operation
of a motor vehicle in a manner that endangers or is likely to endanger
persons or property"--a traffic and not a criminal offense like road
rage. It can include a range of less serious offenses, such as reckless
driving, and does not necessarily require willful and wanton disregard
for the safety of others, according to NHTSA. Examples include speeding
or driving too fast for conditions, improper lane changing, and improper
passing. Some common characteristics of the aggressive driver include
the following:

They are high-risk
drivers, more likely to drink and drive, speed, or drive unbelted.

Their vehicle
provides anonymity, allowing them to take out their frustrations on
other drivers.

Their frustration
levels are high, concern for other motorists, low.

They consider
vehicles as objects and fail to consider the human element involved;
therefore, they seldom consider the consequences of their actions.

They run stop
signs, disobey red lights, speed, tailgate, weave in and out of traffic,
pass on the right, make unsafe lane changes, flash their lights, blow
their horns, or make hand and facial gestures.

Enforcement
Programs and Laws to Curb Aggressive Driving
As of May 1999, 24 states, the District of Columbia, and Ontario, Canada,
have been identified as having active aggressive driving programs aimed
at reducing the types of violations an aggressive driver is liable to
commit, e.g., speeding, following too closely, improperly changing lanes
and passing, and failing to obey traffic signals or to yield the right-of-way.
These programs vary in resources and techniques.

While
California's "Smooth Operator" program, begun in 1988, was probably
the first aggressive driving program in the country, Arizona's legislature
was the first to pass a law specifically addressing aggressive driving.
The bill, enacted May 26, 1998, requires that violators simultaneously
commit a speeding offense and at least two reckless driving offenses before
they can be charged. Such violations include failing to obey traffic control
devices, overtaking and passing another vehicle on the right by driving
off the pavement or main travel portion of the roadway, making unsafe
lane changes, following too closely, or failing to yield the right-of-way.
Virginia passed a law in March 1998 requiring driver education programs
offered through the school system to include aggressive driving instruction.

In
1998, 9 states introduced a total of 26 aggressive driving bills, only
2 of which--the Arizona aggressive driving bill and the Virginia driver
education requirement--were enacted. Four states have bills pending this
year. Most of these bills attempt to define aggressive driving offenses
and establish penalties for them. Some specify characteristics of aggressive
drivers, or give those convicted of the offense certain additional penalties,
such as mandatory educational classes or loss of their licenses for repeat
offenses--similar to impaired driving sanctions. Other options adopted
by state legislators to address aggressive driving include the following:
improving funding of prosecutorial efforts, increasing fines and penalties,
developing state education programs about aggressive driving, emphasizing
seatbelt laws, and legislating traffic camera radar devices.

The
Solution
A U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Aggressive Driving Team, jointly
staffed by NHTSA, FHWA, and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) representatives,
will develop recommendations for a coordinated departmental aggressive
driving program. The program will seek to provide guidance, technical
assistance, and support on aggressive driving-related issues to NHTSA
and FHWA field offices, state and local governments, and to the team's
many public and private partners. Initiatives will include programs involving
enforcement, education, x, traffic engineering, crash analysis, and behavioral
research. Efforts will continue to identify and document the pervasiveness,
nature, and scope of aggressive driving behavior and its associated consequences.

NHTSA's
aggressive driving work plan includes the development of innovative and
effective countermeasures and enforcement strategies. Public information
and education (PI&E) is another important component of these efforts,
as methods, strategies, and programs are developed to inform the public,
law enforcement agencies, engineers, and the judiciary of the potential
dangers of aggressive driving and the steps being taken to reduce its
occurrence and consequences. NHTSA will also continue to hold meetings
and other events, such as the present Aggressive Driving Symposium, to
bring together all the stakeholders involved to discuss effective legal
and other strategies.